Pit Bulls - My city just banned them

A few months ago three pit bulls went on a spree an started biting anyone they saw.  One of the victims is still in the hospital months after they attack(his kids started a web page to ban the pit bulls).  There were other attacks prior to this one so Independence, MO just put a ban on Pit bulls.  There was also another attack in a neighboring city recently.

As a dad of three kids I have no issues with banning pit bulls.  But my neighbor has a Pit bull (which seems like the nicest dog in the world) and he feels this ban in unjust.  Just curious what anyone else thinks on this.  Pitt Bulls scare me because they seem to  be unpredictable...  You don't hear about packs of golden retrievers going on a terror spree.

A referendum petition overturning the ordinance to ban new pit bulls got only 72 votes.  They needed at least 100 votes.  I saw these guys set up in Wal_Mart parking lots and on street corners looking to get signatures to overturn this ruling.  It looks like the public has spoken when on 72 people signed their petition. Would you support a ban on pit bulls in your city?

I think that the problem with pit bulls isn't the dog themselves, but terrible owners. Often people buy Pit Bulls BECAUSE they're known to be violent. They're a "manly" dog (*coughcough* Bullshine. *coughcough* ) The fact is, though, that unlike most other dogs, Pit Bulls are really truly viscious :/

That said, I don't know how to legally force bad owners to stop buying pit bulls and then letting them do what they will. So... second best, I guess.

I guess I agree, but not whole-heartedly.

I think that all dogs have the potential to be dangerous depending on the way they were raised (kinda like kids!), but certain breeds have proven to be more unpredictable and aggressive, pit bulls being one. If all pet owners could be counted on to be responsible and keep their pets leashed and/or behind a fence and took the time to train them properly, it would be wonderful to let whoever own whatever.

However some people just can't be bothered, therefore I would support one and actually I think my city already does have a ban on pit bulls. Not sure though.

Thats a toughie.  As an animal lover, I think it's the owners that are attracted to pit bulls...but then again, they were bred to be fighting dogs and they have these powerful jaws.  I could certainly see a special licensing for them - whereby you would have to take your dog in for obediance training and behavior checks??   As a mother, I would say, let's not chance it and ban the breed.  A person who is intent on owning a mean dog though, will just train any other breed to be this way - what do we do about them?

I support a ban.  Like Jayd said, they do seem to be an unpredicatable breed.  A big part of the problem is the types of people that typically own these dogs.  I'm always wathcing the Animal Cops shows on Animal Planet, and it seems that whenever they confiscate pit bulls, they are owned by thugs that are fighting and beating them.  I don't think it's necessarily all the dogs' fault they are the way they are, but maybe partly the crappy owners who keep perpetuating the aggression. 

We had a pit bull attack two kids and their dog right in front of our house a few months ago.  The boys were walking their dog (on a leash) and a pit bull came out of nowhere and started biting the boys and the dog.  The owner of the pit bull said she was a female in heat and that he had her behind a chain link fence in his fenced in yard.  So she managed to get past two fences?  Hmm,  not sure.  And the dog she attacked was female.  The dog was not prevoked, so I don't know why it attacked.  Who knows, maybe she was a "fighting" dog? 

Real Men own Golden Labs ;)

I think I agree with what roxanned said. I think that in the case of Pit bulls, the breed can be violent because it was overbred to be agressive, but that it is not always the case. I used to work with a lady who had two pit bulls and two small children and there were no problems. I think I would support more strict regulations on the breed due to it's violent tendencies, but I don't know that I would support them being banned entirely because that seems unfair to me.

I am also not a parent though so that might change my views. I guess it really depends on the situation and you can't always know or prevent anything. No one can.

The owners are the problem, not the dog itself.  Any dog can be dangerous.  I have a happy-go-lucky lab that loves everyone and is very tolerant of young children...but...I would still not leave him alone in a room with a young child. 

I would probably not support a ban on any particular breed of dog.  I would, however, support stiffer penalties for owners who are training dogs to be aggressive..especially those who are involved in dog fights.

We don't have any ban where I live, but I know my house insurance will not allow me to have certain breeds, including pit bulls.

My family had a kennel when I was growing up, so I know that you can breed a dog with a difficult temperment.  That is the problem with several breeds that are bred to have agressive traits.  They can also be bred to have the tools to fight and kill with.  Pitt Bulls, unfortunately, fall into that category.  They are big and strong and can do a great deal of damage to people.  Pitt Bulls are one of those breeds that, as a former kennel worker, I would be very uncomfortable with.  My neighbors got one that seems really nice, but so did its mother, right up until she ripped the throat off of a male dog that was trying to mate with her. 

That said, in the hands of a competent, careful owner, there should be no problems.  I would not support a ban on the breed.  But I would support VERY stiff penalties for owners that do not take extreme precautions to keep their animals under control.

So that is my two cents.

I'm very against the ban. Ontario just banned the dogs provience wide. I think it's a sloppy ineffective solution.

The problem is definately the owners. I have a vet clinic as a client, I'm in there regularly for hours at a time and my partner is studying to be a dog trainer.

Pit Bulls raised properly can be lovely family pets. Staffordshire Terriors (which is what most people think of as a pit bull) are a recognized kennle club breed, that is very trainable. They are smart attentive, loyal dogs.

They are however, very atheletic dogs and as a consequence a lot of people have used them in aggressive manners.

To say a dog is bread to be aggressive is wrong. A dog can be trained to be aggressive through abusing the dog. Aggression is not a breeding trait.... it is a socialization trait. That being said a large dog, with a lot of muscle, a strong jaw who is trained to be aggressive is going to cause much more damage than a pomeranian or shi-tzu.

The problem with banning the breed of dog is it doesn't tackle the problem which is the owners.

At the Toronto Humane society we have a lot of proof of this right now. The ban allows all currently living pit bulls to be kept by their owners as pets. It also allows an owner to turn the pit bull in and for it to be given to another owner. However a dog that is abandoned has to go out of province or be put down and any new puppies at this point need to be put down, or sent out of province. And all pit bulls need to wear muzzles (that could be a compromise).

What we are seeing at the humane society is that the people who care about their pets are fighting to keep them and get the ban overturned. The people who were useing them for punching bags have dropped them off as strays and now we can't even give them to a good home because they are now officially "unregistered".

The larger problem is that the people who maltreated pit bulls seem to have picked either rotweillers, german sheppards, or dobermans as their next victims.

So what, more doggie genocide?

Here in Cincinnati, you have to register them specially... but most people don't, they register their pits as french bulldogs which is ridiculous because they look nothing alike.

a 58yo woman from a nearby town was recently attacked/mauled/killed by 6 pit bulls belonging to her neighbor, in her own front yard while watering her flowers. the dog owner to date has not been held accountable because there is no law in place to do so.

i love dogs, even pits, ive owned a dog that was half pit/half dobie. great dog, loved her dearly, but there is a very real genetic tendancy towards aggression that is kinda scary. however, this needs to be addressed. how do you protect public safety?

losetheweight, im from kcmo originally, so i remember going to independence as a child, maybe to see fireworks? i dont recall

Instead they should ban dog owners who don't have a clue how to treat a dog.  People should have to take a licensing test before they can have a pet.  Pits are naturally sweet dogs, very protective and not neccesarily agressive.  They can be taught to fight and be vicious, and neglect and abuse will make them defensive as well.  Once they get started there is no stopping them, and there's the problem.  I had a little cocker spaniel once, who had been abused and she could be as nasty as any badly treated pit, just not as strong.

The only problem with the stiffer penalties for bad owners is that a mauling can still occur.  The stiffer penalties seem to be great after the fact to prosecute but doesn't seem to do a lot to prevent.

 I am not sure if the media over plays it or if it's just true - but doesn't it seem like most vicious attacks are from pit bulls?  I know that rottweilers, german shepherds, dobermans, and other guard dogs can also be vicious.  And I know that any dog can bite.  We once had a beagle as a kid that bit a preacher who came to visit us at the house.  It just seems like pits are always the ones killing someone.  My kids walk to their friends house and ride their bikes all the time; I don't want to be afraid of a pit bull getting one of them (or me).   I didn't mention in my previous post that these maulings happened about four blocks away from my house.  So it really got our attention when we heard the news.  These dogs (a pack of three) were after anyone who was outside that day.  They put several people in the hospital and one guy is still in their)

People who are going to train pit bulls to be aggressive are not going to abide by stronger licensing/ownership requirements ... because they are idiots. Unfortunately, this is another case where idiots ruin something for others.

I know that pits can be great dogs, but unfortunately, they can also be trained to be not-great dogs, and the idiots who train dogs to be not-great dogs are not going to be stopped by stronger licensing/ownership requirements. They will not socialize their dogs properly, will not restrain them properly, and will not keep them muzzled. Some of them don't abide by outright bans, either. Fortunately, pet stores and breeders usually do, so a ban does result in fewer of the banned breed in the locality that bans them.

I think people who want to own animals should be licensed; that would probably prevent the people who live behind me from owning a dog that they neglect, and I think that would be a good thing. This little weiner dog was acquired and then dumped in their backyard with a doghouse; as a puppy, he barked and whined all night and all day long because he was lonely (and, in the winter, probably pretty dang cold). When the family was outside, he barked and yipped, wanting to be with his "pack," but as he was tied up, he could see them, but not play with them because they were in another part of the yard.

But I digress. Get rid of the idiots, not the dogs. Since getting rid of the idiots is (sadly) not possible, the dogs have to go, alas.

I'd call the humane society on the family who lives behind you.

I agree with Athena. Pass all the bans and laws that you want. Some people are not going to obey them. Its part of our society. There are idiots everywhere. Our neighbors (they live down the alley one house) have rottweilers. My daughter and I can't walk down the alley to go to our church.  The rottweilers attack the fence and I'm scared they're going to tear it down.  I never see the owners taking care of them and their dog house is an old car with a mattress thrown in it. My husband keeps a loaded gun by our backdoor (out of reach of kids) for when those dogs get loose. We're thinking its WHEN not IF. These people throw parties, have a junk yard around there house, steal from neighbors and are involved in drugs. They won't follow a ban. We're moving away from them as soon as we can.

How do you keep people from owning dogs?

Those animals literally were trained to 'down' bulls 200 years ago.  They would rush the bull, grab it by the throat and put it on the ground.   That was their job, hence the name, and that inbred aggression can never be undone.  They are a ticking time clock. 

You can't hold all dogs and all dog owners for the few bad ones.  But you can hold a bad dog owner responsible for assault or negligent homicide (in the worst cases) rather than a slap on the wrist.  And a dog who attacks without provocation must be put down. 

There is no "aggressive" gene.

For anyone who studies genetics you will know that socialized traits are not genetically mapped. Physical traits however do cross species and even genus.... for instance there is one gene for all animals that controls the production of eyes. That's right, fish, bird, person, monkey who have eyes all have this gene. It's how it is used the determins the type of eyes. But, no science has ever proven a genetic link to aggression.

That being said obviously dogs and people can be socialized to be aggressive.

Here is what the TO Humane society has regarding Pit Bulls:

"Pit bull" is not a breed, but a "type" that encompasses several registered breeds and crossbreeds. Therefore, statistics that claim "Pit bulls" are responsible for some percentage of attacks are lumping many separate breeds together, then comparing that to other dogs that are counted as individual breeds. There are currently 25 breeds that are commonly considered a "pit bull".Breed identification is left up to victim and witness testimony, and is often wrong. Due to negative press, biting dogs of almost ANY breed have been called "Pit bulls". Try this little quiz for fun: http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/findp it.html See how many people you know can pick out a pit bull from pictures, let alone in the middle of an attack.

When the CDC did a comprehensive study of Staffordshire Terriors (most commonly referred to as pit bulls) their attack rating actually came under that of poodles.

From 1965 - 2001, there have been at least 36 different breeds/types of dog that have been involved in a fatal attack in the United States. (This number rises to at least 52 breeds/types when surveying fatal attacks worldwide). According to the Center for Disease Control (CDC) between 1979 and 1996 there was 60 "pit bull" bite fatalities. Sounds scary, doesn't it? Well consider this: "pit bull" covers 5 different breeds, and there are at least 30 more that look similar enough to be mistaken for a "pit bull". Without differentiating the breeds and lumping them all into one group - when dog bite statistics are taken into consideration versus the population- "Pit Bulls" come in at the BOTTOM of the list.

In fact poodles are involved in a surprisingly high number of attacks.

In Temperment testing here is the ATT answer to if pit bulls are more or less dangerous than any other dog:

Not more vicious than Golden Retrievers, Beagles, or other popular "family" dogs. In a recent testing done [by The American Canine Temperament Testing Society (ATT)], pit bulls achieved a passing rate of 83.9%. Passing 4th from the highest of 122 breeds. That is better than Beagles, passing at 78.2 and Golden Retrievers passing at 83.2%. The average passing rate for ALL breeds is 77%.

The fact is that the media does sensationalize and there are idiot owners out there. The people who were actually hurt by pit bulls are just as likely to have been hurt by other breeds of dogs if those owners had purchased another breed.

Here in TO we can already see the idiots switching to rotweilers and german shepards. Sure we don't hear a lot about attacks from these dogs in the media, but consider that both have been used as guard and police dogs for many many years. Give it 20 years and lets see if any of us are surprised by a proposed ban on dobermans in the future.

The fact is there needs to be harsher laws for people who mistreat their pets, there needs to be more education about owning a pet and there needs to be more accountability for pet owners.

For instance if dog tags were checked as routinely as parking meters, and carried the same fines, if you had to provide in addition to a certificat of vaccination a certificat of a passed obedience course within one year of the purchase of your pet then these may go a long way to prevention. Couple this with higher pentalities for owners of dogs who attack and we are begining to build a solution.

<QUOTE: According to the Center for Disease Control (CDC) between 1979 and 1996 there was 60 "pit bull" bite fatalities. Sounds scary, doesn't it? Well consider this: "pit bull" covers 5 different breeds, and there are at least 30 more that look similar enough to be mistaken for a "pit bull". Without differentiating the breeds and lumping them all into one group - when dog bite statistics are taken into consideration versus the population- "Pit Bulls" come in at the BOTTOM of the list.

In fact poodles are involved in a surprisingly high number of attacks.>

Good info supersized,

I have never heard of a poodle killing someone.  And if there is a case of this how often.  Sure I have heard of poodles biting. The only thing that seems to be different with pits than other dogs is the ability to kill you.  We all now that any dog can bite.  I am sure there has been some nasty bites from poodles, beagles, labs, goldens, and other family dogs.  But how many of those family dogs are killing people?